Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Choose Firefox Now, Or Later You Won't Get A Choice

robert.ocallahan.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 316 posts

Re: Choose Firefox Now, Or Later You Won't Get A Choice

#261

Post by lucb1e »

Silhouette wrote: post #255
shangxiao wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever "looked under the hood" ? Browsers aren't your average weekend open source project, they're behemoths :) I once checked out chromium in order to test out whether file writing would be easy to do. The size of the project alone meant it took me forever to find out where to patch it. (Edit: This was something like 5 years ago before I started to grow a distaste for Chrome)

Have you ever "looked under the hood" ? Browsers aren't your average weekend open source project, they're behemoths I've sometimes wondered whether the barrier to entry is the biggest thing holding back FOSS. I'm an experienced developer, quite capable of diving into the kind of code these projects run. Now and then I have enough spare time that I might be able to make a useful contribution. I would be happy to suppo…

> Large FOSS projects often require a whole set of custom tools.

I was about to say that for the two projects I've tried this with, Filezilla and Firefox, it was actually quite reasonable. Especially Firefox, given its size, was surprisingly simply even if compiling took longer than I thought.

But then I read you are on Windows. Yeah, that's hell. I tried a few hours on Filezilla before deciding that it's just too messed up.

Re: Choose Firefox Now, Or Later You Won't Get A Choice

#262

Post by DCKing »

wfjackson wrote: post #244
DCKing wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think they do. Maybe it's not a huge deal, but it's an advantage to control more aspects of what users use (ISP, OS, browser, and finally the service itself). Fair enough. Make it "Google really does not care much if you use Firefox, Chrome, iOS, Android or whatever". The point is that even if Google prefers that you use Chrome, it's not an argument to go for vendor lock-in. It's an argument maybe for wanting to…

They do try to break other platforms, like refusing to make a YouTube app on Windows Phone and then sending a takedown on a Microsoft written app. YouTube and the content providers do get hurt with these actions but Google doesn't care because they're willing to hurt themselves in order to hurt Windows Phone. Even Vimeo has a Windows Phone app since many years. Also, interesting that this article seems to have comple…

> YouTube and the content providers do get hurt with these actions but Google doesn't care because they're willing to hurt themselves in order to hurt Windows Phone.

This is false. Having third party apps that do not adhere to the ad- and video distribution policies hurts Google/YouTube's money sources. So they have valid reasoning - evil, yes, but valid. The browser app does follow YouTube's policies, so Google's reasoning here is still valid without breaking access to their platform. The browser and MetroTube still work, so it's not as if Google is actively breaking WP access to their services. They just did not accept Microsoft's "official" app.

I do agree that Google should stop being such a scumbag about Windows and just make some apps for them. But "refusing to make an app" does not equate to "breaking another platform". There is/was no official YouTube app for BB10 or WebOS either, and Google is/was not trying to break them either.

Re: Choose Firefox Now, Or Later You Won't Get A Choice

#263

Post by stephenr »

DCKing wrote: post #257
stephenr wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's an argument maybe for wanting to increase market share. This piece suggests that Google has motivation for breaking other platforms though, which I find ridiculous as it will only diminish their returns. I'm going to guess you weren't active in the industry when Microsoft was at it's "peak". Try this little scenario in your head: Google owns web properties that are highly trafficked on a variety of devices/bro…

> I'm going to guess you weren't active in the industry when Microsoft was at it's "peak". Microsoft sold their platforms for money. Microsoft never open sourced anything. All of this "non-standard stuff" is open sourced. Dart and WebP work in Firefox as good as they do in Chrome. NaCl is open source and it looks like a failed project. How is this even remotely comparable to Microsoft's practices? Google are being as…

> Microsoft sold their platforms for money. Microsoft never open sourced anything.

Remind me when Internet Explorer or Hotmail or MSN/Bing was sold for money?

> All of this "non-standard stuff" is open sourced.

Show me where Chrome or Chrome OS are open source.

Explain to me how Android can be considered open source when companies are forced to ship it with Google's services?

> this "Google is the next Microsoft" meme is demonstrably wrong and should die

and yet you haven't really demonstrated that?

Re: Choose Firefox Now, Or Later You Won't Get A Choice

#264

Post by walterbell »

wfjackson wrote: post #244
DCKing wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think they do. Maybe it's not a huge deal, but it's an advantage to control more aspects of what users use (ISP, OS, browser, and finally the service itself). Fair enough. Make it "Google really does not care much if you use Firefox, Chrome, iOS, Android or whatever". The point is that even if Google prefers that you use Chrome, it's not an argument to go for vendor lock-in. It's an argument maybe for wanting to…

They do try to break other platforms, like refusing to make a YouTube app on Windows Phone and then sending a takedown on a Microsoft written app. YouTube and the content providers do get hurt with these actions but Google doesn't care because they're willing to hurt themselves in order to hurt Windows Phone. Even Vimeo has a Windows Phone app since many years. Also, interesting that this article seems to have comple…

> Also, interesting that this article seems to have completely disappeared off HN very suddenly.

This article moved directly from #2 to #247.

It's not obvious why an entire thread of 255 comments was moved, instead of downvoting a single sockpuppet post.

Re: Choose Firefox Now, Or Later You Won't Get A Choice

#265

Post by Silhouette »

lucb1e wrote: post #261
Silhouette wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever "looked under the hood" ? Browsers aren't your average weekend open source project, they're behemoths I've sometimes wondered whether the barrier to entry is the biggest thing holding back FOSS. I'm an experienced developer, quite capable of diving into the kind of code these projects run. Now and then I have enough spare time that I might be able to make a useful contribution. I would be happy to suppo…

> Large FOSS projects often require a whole set of custom tools. I was about to say that for the two projects I've tried this with, Filezilla and Firefox, it was actually quite reasonable. Especially Firefox, given its size, was surprisingly simply even if compiling took longer than I thought. But then I read you are on Windows. Yeah, that's hell. I tried a few hours on Filezilla before deciding that it's just too me…

It's certainly worse overall on Windows, but problems like requiring a specific compiler toolchain apply everywhere. I am always amazed by project that want to encourage an open, community-style development process, and yet the first thing they do is start writing in non-standard C++ that relies on specific GCC functionality, and then linking to libraries that do the same thing. Before you've even started, you've limited your potential contributor base to those who are willing to install not only your choice of compiler (not such a problem on Linux or MacOS, at least) but maybe even a specific version of that compiler (much more of a problem, because usually dev tools are installed system-wide).

Do these projects expect that everyone will just set up a dedicated VM with exactly the right development environment for their code or something? I think that's probably the most practical solution in that kind of environment, but presumably it's a level of of commitment that only dedicated, long-term contributors are likely to make. Certainly it's a disincentive for anyone to contribute one-off fixes or improvements in specific areas, and a significant barrier to entry even for those who might become long-term contributors if they get that far, which surely can't be helping these projects.

Re: Choose Firefox Now, Or Later You Won't Get A Choice

#266

Post by walterbell »

eropple wrote: post #238
findjashua wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You stated facts, with sources. I can't see why someone would downvote, and that too without stating the reason. I upvoted to counter at least one downvoter.

I downvoted and flagged him because he spams this post on Google threads, using a sockpuppet every time. He is not interested in discussion, he's interested in frothing.

Did you flag the entire thread or the single offending post?

Re: Choose Firefox Now, Or Later You Won't Get A Choice

#267

Post by DCKing »

stephenr wrote: post #263
DCKing wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm going to guess you weren't active in the industry when Microsoft was at it's "peak". Microsoft sold their platforms for money. Microsoft never open sourced anything. All of this "non-standard stuff" is open sourced. Dart and WebP work in Firefox as good as they do in Chrome. NaCl is open source and it looks like a failed project. How is this even remotely comparable to Microsoft's practices? Google are being as…

> Microsoft sold their platforms for money. Microsoft never open sourced anything. Remind me when Internet Explorer or Hotmail or MSN/Bing was sold for money? > All of this "non-standard stuff" is open sourced. Show me where Chrome or Chrome OS are open source. Explain to me how Android can be considered open source when companies are forced to ship it with Google's services? > this "Google is the next Microsoft" mem…

You are twisting the argument. Their "extensions" to the web, each and everyone of them, is open source. Find me one of web projects that is not open source. They are giving their platforms away for free and are mostly open source. They compete for use of services.

Microsoft used embrace, extend, extinguish. All of their platforms cost money. They compete(d) for use of platform.

This is exactly why they are different. Maybe equally evil, but different. That is why I say "Google is the next Microsoft" is wrong. Could you please respond to that instead of twisting the argument?

Re: Choose Firefox Now, Or Later You Won't Get A Choice

#268

Post by kybernetyk »

stephenr wrote: post #260
personZ wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't contribute to the discussion. It's a wall of noise hit list of entirely random quality, that draws absolute, nefarious conclusions from complex situations. If someone hates Google, then sure, it's "contributing". If you're just looking for information it's just extremist nonsense. Indeed, this very submission was already submitted a week ago (just as that hit list appeared before), and of course would have…

Right, because on a comment thread about google's ever-increasing control over the web/etc, the following are irrelevant: * A court case about breaching US federal privacy laws * A court case about Google using it's relationship with device manufacturers to negatively impact a company with a competing service * An article about how Google tracks mobile users and the disclosure/notification about said tracking, with i…

Yes, it's interesting. Anything that is remotely critical of Google gets downvoted pretty quick here on HN. Now I don't know if it's because many Google employees browse HN or because people still believe in that "don't be evil" marketing babel.

Re: Choose Firefox Now, Or Later You Won't Get A Choice

#269

Post by darklajid »

evilpie wrote: post #232
darklajid wrote: post #147

Ff fan here. Running Aurora on desktop, laptop and mobile. Love the project, have nothing but minor complains. Currently leading the list: For quite a while FF on Android has a 'broken' long press menu on links. Someone thought that it should be Share Link -> Open Link in New Tab Open Link in Private Tab Copy Link Bookmark Link I.. guess I don't understand how others use their browser. The last action doesn't make se…

Here is a heatmap with data on how often these different buttons are clicked: http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2014/07/firefox-for-androi...

Whoa. Thanks a lot, that's amazing.

Now I'm torn on whether I should open a bug report about it. A useless/unused entry in the most prominent spot, and open link in tab is (not surprising imho) red hot below.

Worth a try?

Re: Choose Firefox Now, Or Later You Won't Get A Choice

#270

Post by pera »

1ris wrote: post #209
pera wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

413 tabs?? why?

Why not? That's the way I use the web. If i need it at some point the next week I don't close it.

I usually bookmark (^D) and tag everything that I think I'm gonna need in the future, then I look for it by typing the tag/s in the address bar.
Post reply on HN